Besides incredible amounts of corruption, can someone explain to me how many people have not been arrested, prosecuted and thrown in jail for this?
The FBI has become incredibly corrupt. The evidence of this is becoming overwhelming. The defense for the FBI is that it's just a few bad apples near the top. I have zero faith in that suggestion. The fact that we are not seeing FBI agents coming forward as whistle blowers speaks volumes IMO. Too many scandals, and almost nobody willing to stand up and tell it like it is. Rotten to the core.
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2018 - 10:01 am:
So my question is this - at what point did we decide that we can try an accused person - and convict them - in the court of public opinion? That's what the Left is expecting us to do re: Kavanaugh...if the woman (accuser) really believes this is true, then she needs to testify. Legally. In court. So that said court can PROVE (legally) that it happened.
This bull$hit "I said it happened, to a newspaper columnist, so you have to convict him based on that because I don't want to testify in front of Congress" is a joke. That's not how the system works.
You want a real conviction?
You have to make a real testimony.
It's how the system works.
If your Liberal handlers told you "you can make unsubstantiated claims about something 35 years ago and you won't ever have to testify (perjure yourself), just saying it will be enough to serve our needs"...well...you're a moron for believing them.
If it really DID happen (doubtful), then you should have no problem testifying to it.
I say, if she won't testify...toss her out, toss the whole situation out, and toss out whoever started promoting it as a reason not to confirm. You push the agenda and it's blatantly false? You're fired.
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2018 - 10:33 am:
To be fair, this isn't about testifying in court. This is not a criminal, or civil legal case. This is about Congress confirming a judicial nominee. They are trying to cry foul, that she needs to be given a chance to be heard. Well, she has been invited to testify in front of Congress on this matter, and it sounds like she is passing on that. Probably a good move given that her story isn't very rock solid, and full of holes. Details such as when this happened, where it happened, how she got there, and how she got home. But if she doesn't want her story to be cross examined in Congress, along with the letter she wrote to Feinstein entered into evidence, so be it. If this were a court of law, the Judge would be telling the jury to dismiss all that you have heard about this matter.
The fact is, this is all politics. It was kept under wraps for months, for a last minute stalling action, hoping to push it past the mid-term election. If the Repukes fall for this, they will really show themselves to be weaker than my worst fears. This is the swamp that runs our government. The whole thing needs to be drained.
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2018 - 11:51 am:
I agree, it's ALL politics.
Doesn't change the fact that he's been tried and convicted in the media and in public opinion, with zero legal (or procedural) process whatsoever.
Whether he gets confirmed or not, he should still sue. "Deterrent". Kinda like the first time my folks let me stick a dime in a light socket - they knew it would also be the LAST time I stuck a dime in a socket. Do the wrong thing...you pay for it. (much to their dismay, though, that was when I also learned that 110v only tickles for a second...). But this accuser, and Feinstein, and the rest of the Dems who are crying foul...they did the wrong thing. If it was true, if he DID assault her, well...even if they were doing the right thing, they still did it the wrong way. You don't get to circumvent the system just because you really, really want to...the system is there for a reason.
Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2018 - 12:02 pm:
The right thing to do would have make it pubic when it came out, allowing the FBI to do their due diligence in their latest background check of Kavanaugh, and putting the letter and, if she were willing, her testimony on the record in his confirmation hearing. Had they done it that way, I might think there was something to this. The strongest bit they have in this whole story, is that she told her couples therapist about this back in 2012. Though details have changed since then. Before giving too much credence to that though, consider this... Is the accusation against Kavanaugh the culmination of a set-up from 2012?